VISHU KUMAR @ BISHU CHANDRWANSHI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./6905/2026 · 2026-08-27
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 24446 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 24446 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:JHHC:25795 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 6905 of 2026
Vishu Kumar @ Bishu Chandrwanshi, aged about 19 years, son of Mukesh Singh @ Kumar, Resident of Sakari Bichli Mathiy, P.O. & P.S. – Sakri, District – Arwal, State - Bihar.
… … Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party ---
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Radha Krishna Gupta, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mr. Satish Prasad, APP
---
06/27.08.2026
Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 11.04.2026 in connection with B.S. City P.S. Case No.42 of 2026, registered under Sections 78 of B.N.S, 2023, Section 66C and 67 (b) of I.T. Act and Section 12 of the POCSO Act, now pending in the court of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-III-cum Special Judge (POCSO Act), Bokaro.
3. The counter-affidavit filed during the court proceedings is taken on record.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the petitioner and the victim were known to each other and that the charge-sheet has already been submitted.
5.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the 16-year-old victim has supported the allegations against the petitioner. He submits that the charge-sheet was filed on 03.07.2026 under Section 78 of BNS, 2023, Sections 66C and 67B of the I.T. Act and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. He further submits that during the investigation, objectionable videos were recovered, as mentioned in paragraph 41 of the case diary.
6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties and considering the direct allegations against the petitioner, as well as the
2026:JHHC:25795 2
victim's statement recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS supporting the prosecution case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.
8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court concerned through “FAX/email”.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Date of Order:27.08.2026 Saurav Date of Uploading:29.08.2026